On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 08:55 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > One use case that comes to mind: someone doing a spin that can't meet the > > Fedora criteria for still being called Fedora. In theory, simply replacing > > fedora-release and fedora-logos is sufficient, but in practice, Fedora (and/or > > Red Hat) shows up a few other places as well. In gnome, System->About Fedora > > still shows up, and System->About Fedora still says "Distributor: Red Hat, > > Inc." (this one probably ought to say "Fedora Project" for Fedora...). In web > > pages, the apache identifier string is still "Apache/2.2.8 (Fedora)", and I'm > > sure there are probably other cases as well. > > Well, there is a difference in saying that we got these packages from > Fedora, and "We are Fedora", and this could wind up being a lengthy > discussion with the RH legal team. Where the problem comes up is where a project is not saying they are Fedora/Red Hat/etc but the packages say they are.. and where that line is where lawyers get lots of money :). -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
